Cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder to increase colorectal cancer screening

BMC Gastroenterology

Samuel B Ho²  Theodore G Ganiats¹  Erik J Groessl¹  Jeffrey K Lee² 

[1] Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego; 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093, USA;Department of Medicine, VA San Diego Healthcare System and University of California, San Diego, 3350 La Jolla Village Drive, San Diego, California 92161, USA

关键词: FOBT;    Screening;    Colorectal Cancer;    Reminder;    Cost-effectiveness;   

Others  :  1113271
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-230X-11-93

 received in 2010-10-11, accepted in 2011-08-25,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low in many areas and cost-effective interventions to promote CRC screening are needed. Recently in a randomized controlled trial, a mailed educational reminder increased CRC screening rates by 16.2% among U.S. Veterans. The aim of our study was to assess the costs and cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder on fecal occult blood test (FOBT) adherence.

Methods

In a blinded, randomized, controlled trial, 769 patients were randomly assigned to the usual care group (FOBT alone, n = 382) or the intervention group (FOBT plus a mailed reminder, n = 387). Ten days after picking up the FOBT cards, a 1-page reminder with information related to CRC screening was mailed to the intervention group. Primary outcome was number of returned FOBT cards after 6 months. The costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the intervention were assessed and calculated respectively. Sensitivity analyses were based on varying costs of labor and supplies.

Results

At 6 months after card distribution, 64.6% patients in the intervention group returned FOBT cards compared with 48.4% in the control group (P < 0.001). The total cost of the intervention was $962 or $2.49 per patient, and the ICER was $15 per additional person screened for CRC. Sensitivity analysis based on a 10% cost variation was $13.50 to $16.50 per additional patient screened for CRC.

Conclusions

A simple mailed educational reminder increases FOBT card return rate at a cost many health care systems can afford. Compared to other patient-directed interventions (telephone, letters from physicians, mailed reminders) for CRC screening, our intervention was more effective and cost-effective.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Lee et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun TJ: Cancer statistics 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 2008, 58:71-96.
• [2]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Use of colorectal cancer tests - United States., 2002, 2004, and 2006. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2008, 57:253-58.
• [3]Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, Moss SM, Amar SS, Balfour TW, James PD, Mangham CM: Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1996, 348:1472-1477.
• [4]Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jørgensen OD, Søndergaard O: Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet 1996, 348:1467-1471.
• [5]Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, Snover DC, Bradley GM, Schuman LM, Ederer F: Reducing mortality form colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med 1993, 328:1365-1371.
• [6]Screening for colorectal cancer: U. S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement Ann Intern Med 2008, 149:627-637.
• [7]National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN): Colorectal cancer screening. [http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/colorectal_screening.pdf] webciteClinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology -- v.1.2009 Jenkintown, PA: NCCN; 2009. Accessed April 4, 2009
• [8]Vernon SW: Participation in colorectal cancer screening: a review. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997, 89:1406-1422.
• [9]Winchester DP, Shull JH, Scanlon EF, Murrell JV, Smeltzer C, Vrba P, Iden M, Streelman DH, Magpayo R, Dow JW, Synlvester J: A mass screening program for colorectal cancer using chemical testing for occult blood in the stool. Cancer 1980, 45:2955-2958.
• [10]Stokamer CL, Tenner CT, Chaudhuri J, Vazquez E, Bini EJ: Randomized controlled trial of the impact of intensive patient education on compliance with fecal occult blood testing. J Gen Intern Med 2005, 20:278-282.
• [11]Mahon SM: The impact of mailing fecal occult blood test kits on return rate in a community cancer screening center. Oncol Nurs Forum 1995, 22:1269-1273.
• [12]Lee JK, Reis V, Liu S, Conn L, Groessl EJ, Ganiats TG, Ho SB: Improving fecal occult blood testing compliance using a mailed educational reminder. J Gen Intern Med 2009, 24:1192-1197.
• [13]Lantz PM, Stencil D, Lippert MT, Jaros L, Eaker ED: Implementation issues and costs associated with a proven strategy for increasing breast and cervical cancer screening among low income women. J Public Health Manag Pract 1996, 2:54-59.
• [14]Saywell RM, Champion VL, Skinner CS, Menon U, Daggy J: A cost-effectiveness comparison of three tailored interventions to increase mammography screening. J Womens Health 2004, 13:909-918.
• [15]Denberg TD, Coombes JM, Byers TE, Marcus AC, Feinberg LE, Steiner JF, Ahnen DJ: Effect of a mailed brochure on appointment-keeping for screening colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2006, 145:895-900.
• [16]Chirikos TN, Christman LK, Hunter S, Roetzheim RG: Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to increase cancer screening in primary care settings. Prev Med 2004, 39:230-238.
• [17]Lewis CL, Brenner AT, Griffith JM, Pignone MP: The uptake and effect of a mailed multi-modal colon cancer screening intervention: A pilot controlled trial. Implement Sci 2008, 3:32. BioMed Central Full Text
• [18]Lairson DR, DiCarlo M, Myers RE, Wolf T, Cocroft J, Sifri R, Rosenthal M, Vernon SW, Wender R: Cost-effectiveness of targeted and tailored interventions on colorectal cancer screening use. Cancer 2008, 112:779-788.
• [19]Wolf MS, Fitzner KA, Powell EF, McCaffrey KR, Pickard AS, McKoy JM, Lindenberg J, Schumock GT, Carson KR, Ferreira MR, Dolan NC, Bennett CL: Costs and cost-effectiveness of a health care provider-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among veterans. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:8877-8883.
• [20]Sequist TD, Franz C, Ayanian JZ: Cost-effectiveness of patient mailings to promote colorectal cancer screening. Med Care 2010, 48:553-557.
• [21]The Flesch Reading Ease Readability Formula [http://www.readabilityformulas.com] webcite Accessed May 10, 2007
• [22]Latimer EA, Becker ER: Incorporating practice costs into the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale. Med Care 1992, 30:NS50-60.
• [23]American Medical Association. Socioeconomic Characteristics of Medical Practice. Chicago: American Medical Association; 1991.
• [24]Physician Payment Review Commission. Practice Expenses Under the Medicare fee Schedule. A Resource-Based Approach. Washington, DC: Physician Payment Review Commission; 1992.
• [25]Herman WH, Hoerger TJ, Brandle M, Hicks K, Sorensen S, Zhang P, Hamman RF, Ackermann RT, Engelgau MM, Ratner RE, Diabetes Prevention Research Group: The cost-effectiveness of lifestyle modification or metformin in preventing type 2 diabetes in adults with impaired glucose tolerance. Ann Intern Med 2005, 142:323-332.
• [26]Gold MR: Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. 1st edition. Oxford University Press Oxford; 1996.
• [27]Shankaran V, McKoy JM, Dandade N, Nonzee N, Tigue CA, Bennett CL, Denberg TD: Costs and cost-effectiveness of a low-intensity patient-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening. J Clin Oncol 2007, 25:5248-5253.
• [28]Thompson RS, Michnich ME, Gray J, Friedlander L, Gilson B: Maximizing compliance with hemoccult screening for colon cancer in clinical practice. Med Care 1986, 24:904-914.
• [29]Myers RE, Ross EA, Wolf TA, Balshem A, Jepson C, Millner L: Behavioral interventions to increase adherence in colorectal cancer screening. Med Care 1991, 29:1039-1050.
• [30]Cole SR, Young GP, Esterman A, Cadd B, Morcom J: A randomized trial of the impact of new faecal haemoglobin test technologies on population participation in screening for colorectal cancer. J Med Screen 2003, 10:117-22.
• [31]Ko CW, Dominitz JA, Nguyen TD: Fecal occult blood testing in a general medical clinic: comparison between guaiac-based and immunochemical-based tests. Am J Med 2003, 115:111-114.
• [32]Levi Z, Rozen P, Hazari R, Vilkin A, Waked A, Maoz E, Birkenfeld S, Leshno M, Niv Y: A quantitative immunochemical fecal occult blood test for colorectal neoplasia. Ann Intern Med 2007, 146:244-255.